Development of a direct competitive enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay (dc-ELISA) for the detection of scopolamine in wheat
Bibliographic record
Abstract
:A competitive direct enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay (dc-ELISA) was developed for the detection and quantification of scopolamine (SCO) in wheat flours and cereal samples (multigrain, oat and barley). The limit of quantification (IC20) of the established method was 6.00 ± 1.20 ng/g, with the limit of detection (IC10) being 2.4 ± 0.6 ng/g in wheat flour with a coefficient of variation (CV) less than 20%. The assay was highly specific to SCO and nor-scopolamine, with no cross-reactivity to other similar structures. In spiked wheat flours the recoveries ranged from 84% to 104% with CVs of less than 20% and the recovery from a Food Analysis Performance Assessment Scheme (FAPAS) buckwheat control sample was 118%. A comparison of spiked wheat flour and a FAPAS control sample showed similar results to those determined by classical LC-MS/MS methods. A small retail survey of wheat flours and cereal samples was conducted using this ELISA method and a LC-MS/MS method, which showed scopolamine was not detected in any of these survey samples by either method. This method is suitable for rapid quantitation of SCO in wheat flours and cereal samples.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".